Museums and Repatriation

“Visitors Entering the Opening of the George Gustav Heye Center of the National Museum of the American Indian,” By Sarna, Martin, October 30, 1994, Smithsonian Archives – History Div., SIA2011-1381. Via https://siarchives.si.edu/blog/lightning-fast-legislation-national-museum-american-indian

Many laws and regulations impact museums across the United States and require museums to re-examine their collections. Two of the most important laws for collections are the National Museum of the American Indian Act of 1989 (NMAIA) and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA). These two laws, passed just a year apart, mirror each other in several ways. NMAIA regulates the Smithsonian collections, whereas NAGPRA applies to all other institutions, museums, and universities which receive federal funding in any form. In light of the thirty-fifth anniversary of NMAIA and the new regulations added to NAGPRA this past January, let’s look back on the NMAIA and NAGPRA and their legacy today.

The Birth of the National Museum of the American Indian

As part of the Smithsonian, the National Museum of the American Indian (NMAI) focuses on the histories, languages, and cultures of Indigenous peoples in the western hemisphere. The museum has a vast collection is over 800,000 artifacts and more than 100,000 photographs.[1] Much of this collection was acquired in the early 20^th century by George Gustav Heye, whose family fortune came from the Standard Oil Company.[2] His collection contained artifacts and photographs of people from across the Americas and served as the basis for the Museum of the American Indian (MAI) which was founded in 1916 and opened in November of 1922.[3]  By the late 1960s, the MAI faced an unclear future after a period of financial difficulties.[4] The National Museum of the American Indian Act, passed in 1989, combined the MAI’s collection and the relevant holdings of the Smithsonian to form the National Museum of the American Indian and secured funding to care for the combined holdings. Introduced by Senator Daniel K. Inouye (D. of Hawaii), NMAIA was passed on November 13, 1989, and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush on November 28, 1989.[5] The NMAI act created a national museum which focused solely on Native American cultures, literature, histories, and languages, while including their modern-day communities. The act formed one museum at three sites: the Alexander Hamilton US Custom House in lower Manhattan as a permanent exhibit and education space in New York City, the Cultural Resources Center in Suitland, Maryland, as a home and point of access and support for the museum and its services, and a new museum on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.[6] During its formation, the museum met with hundreds of Indigenous communities over the course of two years.[7] The act also created a repatriation policy and appropriated funds for the inventory of human remains within the Smithsonian’s collections, which had long been a point of contention.[8] The NMAI act was amended further in 1996 (Public Law 104-278).

Repatriation: A Shift Toward Ethical Stewardship

Repatriation is the return of human remains, burial goods, sacred objects, and cultural patrimony to the original communities or lineal descendants of the individual. Jacquetta Smith, in October of 2020, discusses her work in repatriation of the NMAI’s holdings, and explains the difference between the NMAI act and NAGPRA.[9] The National Museum of the American Indian Act of 1989 is the first law passed within the United States which requires the return of human remains and their burial goods. The NMAI act applies only to the Smithsonian collections. NAGPRA applies to all other museums, universities, and agencies which receive federal funding and hold Native American collections.[10] The importance of these laws in the field of museum work cannot be understated. Many objects and artifacts that end up in museums were originally acquired in a less than ethical manner. Archaeological digs, done without the descendants’ knowledge nor consent, disrupted graves and destroyed sites meant for a person’s final rest. Some individuals collected remains or objects because they were under the false impression that Native Americans were disappearing. Others purchased pieces from third party retailers, sometimes without knowing that the item was sacred, and eventually donated it to a museum. Without the NMAIA and NAGPRA, museums across the country may not have been prompted to repatriate any of their collections.

“The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act,” Newberry Library, Photo courtesy of the George H. Bush Presidential Library and Museum, https://digital.newberry.org/scalar/indians-midwest/media/native-american-graves-protection-and-repatriation-act

Understanding NAGPRA: Scope and Impact on Museums

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA) has been in effect for thirty-four years, which has been plenty of time to realize and document its shortcomings. This January of 2024, new regulations for NAGPRA came into effect. These new regulations require museums and universities that receive federal funding and hold Native American collections to re-evaluate their holdings and reinitiate consultation with federally recognized Native nations, tribes, and Native Hawaiian Organizations. Federal funding most often comes in the form of grants, which require the writing of proposals and applications asking for a certain amount of funds, usually not fully granted, to accomplish a specific exhibit or project.[11] Once museums receive federal funds, they are required to comply with NAGPRA, including repatriation. Many members of the general public, and museums, tend to fear that museums could lose their entire collections to requests for repatriation. These same fears were expressed after the initial passing of the NMAI act and NAGPRA a little over thirty years ago, as well as with the most recent regulations. The reality is that many tribes are not interested in requesting the return of all the objects that all museums have in their collections. For an object to be subject to repatriation, the burden of proof is substantial. Lineal or cultural descent and direct affiliation between the object and the cultural group requesting repatriation must be proven to a clear and reasonable standard. Each object or ancestor repatriated has been fully justified. Although there is a cost on resources, museums are eligible for grants through the National Parks Service that cover the cost of repatriation.[12] NAGPRA specifically regulates collections of Native American remains and objects because museum collections of human remains and sacred objects are disproportionately of Indigenous origin. Repatriation, or the return of human remains, sacred objects, and cultural patrimony to their communities of origin, is an important step in beginning to repair relationships and rebuild trust.

National Museum of the American Indian, Visit, Washington D.C., Smithsonian Institute, https://americanindian.si.edu/visit/reopening

Evolving Relationships: Indigenous Voices in Museum Practices

Both NMAIA and NAGPRA have many areas where they fall short. Indigenous folks have been voicing their constructive criticisms and concerns since prior to the passage of both laws. These are not perfect pieces of legislation despite amendments and additional regulations. Enforcing museum compliance is often underwhelming and absurdly expensive. Both laws place most of the labor involved onto the tribal nations. Often, tribal nations have less of the funding and resources that the offending museum has. However, like the new regulations added this year, it is possible that further additions could address these concerns and better the reality on the ground. Recently, the updated regulations for NAGPRA require museums, at least those which receive federal funding in some form, to collaborate and communicate more clearly with federally recognized Native American and Native Alaskan nations, tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations (NHOs). Similarly, although without the prompting of additional amendments and regulations, the National Museum of the American Indian has updated its policy of shared stewardship and ethical returns and has striven to better collaborate with Indigenous communities. It is vital to require the return of ancestors and transparency of information. These new regulations demand that museums do better and treat communities better than in the past.

Bailey DeSimone, “Observing Native American Heritage Month and Veterans History Month at the NMAI,” Library of Congress Blogs, November 7th, 2023, https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2023/11/observing-native-american-heritage-month-and-veterans-history-month-at-the-nmai/

While the NMAIA and NAGPRA may not be perfect, they are both living and ever evolving and the museums they regulate are not stagnate either. By beginning the process of repatriation and prioritizing the descendants, tribes, NHOs, and Alaskan Natives, the museum field is improving, and hopefully future regulations and changes can better center the agency of these sovereign peoples. Like the NMAI and their policy updates, each museum is also able to do more than the minimum the law requires within their policies, their procedures, their exhibits, the content they share, and the training they provide to their staff. There are numerous opportunities to involve and consult with tribal representatives and begin the work to repair relationships and build trust between the museum and Indigenous communities.

Further Reading:

• Government Accountability Office, “Smithsonian Institution: Much Work Still Needed to Identify and Repatriate Indian Human Remains and Object,” GAO-11-515, Published May 25, 2011, Smithsonian Institution: Much Work Still Needed to Identify and Repatriate Indian Human Remains and Objects | U.S. GAO
• https://www.si.edu/museums/american-indian-museum
• https://guides.loc.gov/national-american-indian-heritage-month/history-and-overview
• https://www.indian-affairs.org/repatriationlaws.html
• Home | Native Knowledge 360° – Interactive Teaching Resources (si.edu)
• Maddie Finn, “Off the Wall: A Conversation on Repatriation at the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian,” The Hoya, October 21, 2020, https://thehoya.com/guide/off-the-wall-a-conversation-on-repatriation-at-the-smithsonian-national-museum-of-the-american-indian/
• https://aacimotaatiiyankwi.org/
• https://delawaretribe.org/
• https://www.delawarenation-nsn.gov/

---

Sources

Carpio, Myla Vincenti. “(Un)disturbing Exhibitions: Indigenous Historical Memory at the NMAI,” American Indian Quarterly vol. 30, no. ¾ (Summer-Autumn 2006): 619-631. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4139032

Cilella, Salvatore G. “Fundraising for the Small Museum.” History News 55, no. 2 (2000): 1–8. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42653739.

Douglas E., Evelyn. “The Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian: An International Institution of Living Cultures,” The Public Historian vol. 28, no.2 (Spring 2006):51-56. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/tph.2006.28.2.51

Finn, Maddie. “Off the Wall: A Conversation on Repatriation at the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian,” The Hoya, October 21, 2020, https://thehoya.com/guide/off-the-wall-a-conversation-on-repatriation-at-the-smithsonian-national-museum-of-the-american-indian/

Fthenakis, Lisa. “Lightning Fast Legislation for the National Museum of the American Indian,” Smithsonian Institution Archives, November 29^th, 2018, https://siarchives.si.edu/blog/lightning-fast-legislation-national-museum-american-indian

Government Accountability Office, “Smithsonian Institution: Much Work Still Needed to Identify and Repatriate Indian Human Remains and Object,” GAO-11-515, Published May 25, 2011, Smithsonian Institution: Much Work Still Needed to Identify and Repatriate Indian Human Remains and Objects | U.S. GAO

Kauanui, J. Kēhaulani. “Contradictions and Celebrations: A Hawaiian Reflection on the Opening of the NMAI,” American Indian Quarterly vol. 29, no. ¾ (Summer-Autumn 2005): 496-504. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4138986

Kerr, Whitney. “Giving Up the “I”: How the National Museum of the American Indian Appropriated Tribal Voices,” American Indian Law Review vol. 29, no.2 (2004/2005): 421-442. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20070740

Legal Information Institute, Pub. L. 101-185, Nov. 28, 1989, 103 Stat. 1337, Cornell Law School, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/80q-1 .

Lonetree, Amy. “Guest Editor’s Remarks: Critical Engagements with the NMAI,” American Indian Quarterly vol. 30, no. ¾ (Summer – Autumn 2006):507-510. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4139026

Lujan, James. “A Museum of the Indian, Not for the Indian,” American Indian Quarterly vol. 29, no. ¾ (Summer-Autumn 2005):510-516. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4138988

National Museum of the American Indian, “Shared Stewardship and Ethical Returns,” Accessed October 14^th, 2024. https://americanindian.si.edu/explore/collections/shared-stewardship-and-ethical-returns

National Museum of the American Indian, “Repatriation,” Smithsonian, Accessed October 14^th, 2024, Repatriation | National Museum of the American Indian (si.edu).

National Museum of the American Indian Act of 1989, Pub. L. No. 101-185, 103 STAT. 1336 (1989). https://www.congress.gov/bill/101st-congress/senate-bill/978

“National Museum of the American Indian,” Smithsonian Archives, accessed October 29^th, 2024, https://siarchives.si.edu/history/national-museum-american-indian

“The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act,” Newberry Library, Photo courtesy of the George H. Bush Presidential Library and Museum, https://digital.newberry.org/scalar/indians-midwest/media/native-american-graves-protection-and-repatriation-act

---

Footnotes

[1] Evelyn E. Douglas, “The Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian: An International Institution of Living Cultures,” The Public Historian vol. 28, no.2 (Spring 2006): 52. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/tph.2006.28.2.51

[2] Lisa Fthenakis, “Lightning Fast Legislation for the National Museum of the American Indian,” Smithsonian Institution Archives, November 29^th, 2018, https://siarchives.si.edu/blog/lightning-fast-legislation-national-museum-american-indian

[3] Lisa Fthenakis, “Lightning Fast Legislation for the National Museum of the American Indian,” Smithsonian Institution Archives, November 29^th, 2018, https://siarchives.si.edu/blog/lightning-fast-legislation-national-museum-american-indian ; National Museum of the American Indian, “Shared Stewardship and Ethical Returns,” Accessed October 14^th, 2024. https://americanindian.si.edu/explore/collections/shared-stewardship-and-ethical-returns ; Evelyn E. Douglas, “The Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian: An International Institution of Living Cultures,” The Public Historian vol. 28, no.2 (Spring 2006): 52. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/tph.2006.28.2.51

[4] “National Museum of the American Indian,” Smithsonian Archives, accessed October 29^th, 2024, https://siarchives.si.edu/history/national-museum-american-indian

[5] Lisa Fthenakis, “Lightning Fast Legislation for the National Museum of the American Indian,” Smithsonian Institution Archives, November 29^th, 2018, https://siarchives.si.edu/blog/lightning-fast-legislation-national-museum-american-indian ; Evelyn E. Douglas, “The Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian: An International Institution of Living Cultures,” The Public Historian vol. 28, no.2 (Spring 2006): 52. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/tph.2006.28.2.51 ; National Museum of the American Indian Act of 1989, Pub. L. No. 101-185, 103 STAT. 1336 (1989). https://www.congress.gov/bill/101st-congress/senate-bill/978

[6] Evelyn E. Douglas, “The Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian: An International Institution of Living Cultures,” The Public Historian vol. 28, no.2 (Spring 2006): 52. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/tph.2006.28.2.51

[7] Evelyn E. Douglas, “The Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian: An International Institution of Living Cultures,” The Public Historian vol. 28, no.2 (Spring 2006): 52. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/tph.2006.28.2.51

[8] Lisa Fthenakis, “Lightning Fast Legislation for the National Museum of the American Indian,” Smithsonian Institution Archives, November 29^th, 2018, https://siarchives.si.edu/blog/lightning-fast-legislation-national-museum-american-indian

[9] Maddie Finn, “Off the Wall: A Conversation on Repatriation at the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian,” The Hoya, October 21, 2020, https://thehoya.com/guide/off-the-wall-a-conversation-on-repatriation-at-the-smithsonian-national-museum-of-the-american-indian/

[10] Maddie Finn, “Off the Wall: A Conversation on Repatriation at the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian,” The Hoya, October 21, 2020, https://thehoya.com/guide/off-the-wall-a-conversation-on-repatriation-at-the-smithsonian-national-museum-of-the-american-indian/

[11] Salvatore G. Cilella, “Fundraising for the Small Museum.” History News 55, no. 2 (2000): 6. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42653739.

[12] “Grant Opportunities”, National Parks Service, last modified September 12^th, 2024, https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nagpra/grant-opportunities.htm